User talk:Dentonkarl

 Hello, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of Contents


 * Department directory

Need help?


 * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
 * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.


 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
 * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.


 * Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.


 * Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.


 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

, good luck, and have fun.

School
Hi Karl. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and includes factual information. We don't remove verifiable content because someone is unhappy with it. You need also to have a look at Conflict of interest, which makes clear that anyone directly involved with the topic of an article has to be particularly careful to maintain Wikipedia's Neutral point of view.

The best thing to do for the encyclopedia and the school might be to create an article about the school which gives more information about other aspects of it, thus diluting the effect of the sourced information about the unfortunate past. Preferably including sourced information from resources other than the school's own website (news coverage of outstanding achievements, writeups of innovative teaching methods, architectural description of buildings, links to Ofsted and Educ Leeds, etc - you could have a look at Treloar School or some of the schools listed here for ideas).

I know nothing about the school, it's just that I have Boston Spa on my "watch list" as one of many Leeds articles, but I am unwilling to see sourced material removed. I actually looked at the school's web site to see if I could find enough interesting material to start an article about the school itself (I was looking for how old it was, whether it's run by the diocese or what, any (other!) interesting history, architecturally significant buildings either historic or contemporary), but couldn't find enough. If there was an article about the school, then it might be argued that the news item is more relevant to that article than to the general Boston Spa article, so there might be an argument for removing it from the BS page if it appeared on the school page (where it would be just one section in among other material). Meanwhile, I've reverted your edit. I hope you can understand why. PamD (talk) 07:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Signing
Hi, Just a PS: When you add anything to a Talk page, you should sign it by typing four tildes (ie ~ ) or use the signature button on the toolbar (10th from the left on my display, but I may have set some options differently). There's a "bot" called "sinebot" which goes around and signs unsigned contributions, but it's good manners, at least, and possibly mandatory, to sign your comments. Thanks. PamD (talk) 07:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

three revert rule
You are in danger of getting yourelf blocked from editing WikiPedia - see the three revert rule. PamD (talk) 07:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Karl. I agree entirely with the explanation and advice given above by PamD. It would make more sense to write a positive and factual article about the school than to become involved in an edit war.--Harkey (talk) 07:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Just found an official template to give the same warning (and I think you're already over the limit):

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. PamD (talk) 07:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

further suggestion
Karl, Googling a bit further I've now found this book which shows the school has been around since 1875. Presumably you've got access to that book, so there must be plenty of content for an interesting article about 134 years of the school, in which one incident a couple of decades ago is just one small element. And I see Wikipedia has no information on the Maternal Reflective Method, so there's scope for an article about that, or if St John's is the pioneer user of it you could have a section on it with a "Redirect" from that to the school article. Your best way forward is to add positive (accurate, sourced, noteworthy) information about the school. PamD (talk) 08:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Good to see that you've added positive info - and I've supported it by making links and adding ref. I see the school was already mentioned on Gabby Logan's site, but with a slightly different form of the name.  Before creating an article, you need to establish which form of the name to use... and then provide "Redirects" from all the other variations (St./St/Saint, John's/Johns, the Deaf/Deaf Children, not to mention capitalisation).  The Ofsted report is good and positive, isn't it... and I've found a quote there to balance the negative info.  But there's now too much about the school in the village article, so the sooner you or someone else creates a page for the school, the better, and we can move that info across.  I might get round to creating at least a "stub" article some time, but haven't got any info about the history, which I'm sure is interesting. On the other hand I now feel inspired to create an article about the Radio 4 Appeal, which is curiously hidden on WikiPedia and doesn't even appear in the List of BBC Radio 4 programmes, so I might leave the school article for someone else.  Good luck with your editing. PamD (talk) 09:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I've now made an article about the school, with info from Ofsted, DCMS, and the school website, and a picture from Geograph. I'm sure there's a lot more to be said about its history, but you or someone else at the school can add that - just remember to keep it factual, avoid "peacock" terms, keep neutral point of view, and give references. I'm confused on two points: the book seems to be a history starting 1875, but you say 1869; and "Catholic" is in the name but Ofsted calls it non-denominational, so I haven't mentioned religion in the "Infobox". You could add it if appopriate. Over to you, now - I only started this by ojecting to removal of sourced info from Boston Spa, and I've now created two new articles, St John's Catholic School for the Deaf and Radio 4 Appeal! PamD (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)